Network Simulation and Testing-General System Analysis The Internet Evaluating the Internet

(1)

Network Simulation and Testing

Polly Huang EE NTU

http://cc.ee.ntu.edu.tw/~phuang phuang@cc.ee.ntu.edu.tw

(2)

Today

General System Analysis

The Internet

(3)

The Engineering Cycle

• For a running system

– Monitor the usage – Characterize the

workload

– Predict for the future – Revise original design – Instrument the changes – And back to the top

System Usage Monitoring Workload Characterization Performance Prediction Alternatives

General

System

(4)

Chicken or Egg

• But where did it all

start?

– It depends

– The Internet case? – The alternatives

selection

– But it’s really just experts’ intuition System Instrumentation Usage Monitoring Workload Characterization Performance Prediction Alternatives Selection

General

System

(5)

Sounds Easy…

Yah, easy to talk about it…

(6)

Monitoring the Usage

System Instrumentation Usage Monitoring Workload Characterization Performance Prediction Alternatives Selection

General

System

• Monitor the usage

– Measurement methodology – Measurement tools

• Characterize the workload • Predict for the future

• Revise original design • Instrument the changes

(7)

Characterizing the Workload

General

System

• Characterize the workload

– Modeling the measured data

– The model needs to remain valid for data from taken at different time/location

• Predict for the future • Revise original design

(8)

Predicting the Performance

General

System

– Anticipate the user access pattern, demand increase – Evaluate the existing’s

capacity

• Revise original design • Instrument the changes

(9)

Designing the Alternatives

General

System

• Revise original design

– If the current system won’t live up to the challenge, how can it be changed… – Effective solutions

(10)

Instrumenting the Changes

General

System

• Monitor the usage

• Characterize the

workload

• Predict for the future

• Revise original design

• Instrument the

changes

– Politics

(11)

If This is the Telephone Network

• Monitor the usage

– The big players place monitors all over the

places in their own networks to collect data

• Characterize the workload

– Fit the collected data to the well-known models

– Human voice is Poisson

(12)

Telephone Network (cont)

• Predict for the future

– Queuing theory:

• Safe to supply 1 bandwidth for a call of average rate 1

 1 +2 bandwidth for calls of average rate 1 and 2

– Linear programming:

• Given the max tolerable blocking rate, max the profit

– Mostly infrastructure-ral

– I.e., rearranging or adding switches&cables

• Instrument the changes

(13)

No Real Difficulties

(14)

Is the data network as profitable?

(15)

Today

General System Analysis

The Internet

(16)

Internet

: Basic Components

• Think the

postal system

• Nodes

– End hosts

and less number of

routers

– Homes

and local/remote

post offices

• Links

– Connecting

nodes (Access net, Ethernet, T1,

T3, OC3, OC12, etc)

(17)

Internet:

Basic Constructions

• Packets

– Destined to IP addresses (129.132.66.28)

– Destined to postal addresses (1, Sec. 4 Roosevelt Rd.)

• Protocols

– Packets sent with TCP (reliable)

– Packets sent with registered mail with confirmation – But no congestion control

(18)

Internet Protocol Stack

• Application: supporting network

applications

– FTP, SMTP, HTTP

• Transport: host-host data transfer

– TCP, UDP

• Network: routing of datagrams from source to destination

– IP (addressing, routing, forwarding)

• Link: data transfer between neighboring network elements

– Error Checking, MAC, Ethernet

application transport

network link physical

(19)

Data Network Research

(Side-Bar)

• Application

– HTTP evolution

– Web caching

• Transport

– TCP evolution

• Network

– Unicast routing

• QoS

– Problem Detection (loss,

• Mobile and Wireless

– Isolating drops due to bit error for TCP

– Routing for dynamic networks

• P2P

– Distributed directory for effective searching

(20)

Internet Protocol Stack

(Back to the Topic)

• Application: supporting network applications

– FTP, SMTP, HTTP

• Transport: host-host data transfer

– TCP, UDP

• Network: routing of datagrams from source to destination

– IP (addressing, routing, forwarding)

• Link: data transfer between neighboring network elements

– Error Checking, MAC, Ethernet

application transport

network link physical

(21)

Physical communication

application transport network link physical application transport network link physical application application network link physical data data

(22)

The Network Core

• Mesh of interconnected

routers

– Routers under the same administration are deemed

within one Autonomous System (or domain)

– Backbone ASs vs. edge ASs

• Data sent thru net in discrete

“chunks”

– Packet switching

(23)

Internet: The Network

• The Global Internet consists of

Autonomous Systems

(AS)

interconnected with each other:

– Stub AS: small corporation: one connection to other AS’s – Multihomed AS: large corporation (no transit): multiple

connections to other AS’s

– Transit AS: provider, hooking many AS’s together

• Two-level routing:

(24)

Internet AS Hierarchy

Inter-AS border (exterior gateway) routers

(25)

Circuit-Switched Network

The Telephone Network

(26)

Internet: The Traffic

Differences:

 packets as low-level component  multiple kinds of traffic

(27)

Let’s come back to this question:

(28)

Today

General System Analysis

The Internet

(29)

What If This is the Internet

• Monitor the usage

– The big players place monitors all over the places in their own networks to collect data

– Would this give you representative data?

• Characterize the workload

– Fit the collected data to the well-known models – Human voice is Poisson

(30)

Internet (cont)

• Predict for the future

– Queuing theory:

• Save to supply 1 bandwidth for a call of average rate 1

 1 +2 bandwidth for calls of average rate 1 and 2

– Average, a good measure? Does traffic add up?

– Mostly infrastructure-ral

– Still infrastructure-ral?

• Instrument the changes

– Have full authority to change

(31)

For the Most of These Questions

(32)

Repeat The Engineering Cycle

• For the Internet

– Monitor the usage

• Passive and active measurement

– Characterize the workload

• Traffic, topology, routing errors, access pattern modeling

– Predict for the future

• Scalable simulation & testing tools

– Revise original design

• Protocol and Infrastructure

– Instrument the changes

Scalable Packet-level Simulation Internet Instrumentation (IETF) Reliable Measurement Internet Characterization Structure & Design Decision

The

Internet

(33)

Relevance to This Course

• Objective

– We know something better than others do

– We do the right experiments so the results will

be convincing

• Requirements

– Representative (or best known) workload

– Trusted (most used) tools

(34)

Workload

• Traffic

– Packet-level characteristics

– Correlation to protocol and user behavior

– Know better how to generate traffic for your experiments

• Topology

– Router/domain-level connectivity – Correlation to routing

(35)

Tools

• ns-2

– About the most popular in the research

community

– Platform for cross-examination

• dummynet

– Not the only one

(36)

The Useful Theory

Statistics

(37)

Keyword: Heavy-tailed

• It turned out computer processes tend to be

heavy-tailed or power-law distributed!

– CPU time consumed by Unix processes – Size of Unix files

– Size of compressed video frames – Size of FTP bursts

– Telnet packet interarrivals – Size of Web items

(38)

(39)

Review Some Statistics

• Density vs. Distribution

• Poisson

• Exponential

• Pareto

• Self-similarity

(40)

Density vs. Distribution

• Density is the probability of certain events

to happen

– f(x)

• Distribution is usually referred to as the

accumulative density

– f(0)+f(dz)+f(2*dz)+…+f(x)

– F(x) = 

0->x

f(z) dz

(41)

Exponential

• # of time units between events

• f(x) = ce

-cx

(42)

(43)

Poisson

• # of events per time unit

• f(x) = ce

-c

/x!

(44)

(45)

Pareto

• One of the heavy-tailed distributions

• f(x) = c*k

c

/(x

c+1

)

(46)

(47)

Distinguishing Them

• Density

• Log density

(48)

Density

Log Density

Log-Log Density

(49)

Teletraffic vs. Data traffic

• Teletraffic

• Data traffic

Exponential_{Heavy tailed} Exponential Exp

(50)

• High variability (bursty)

• Long-range dependence

• Self-similarity

• High variability (bursty)

• Long-range dependence

• Self-similarity

• Performance problem every

1-2 hour (network lags!)

• Profitable business?

• Performance problem every

1-2 hour (network lags!)

• Profitable business?

10ms 100ms 1s 10s 100s

(51)

Self-similarity?

• Distributions of

#packets/unit

look alike in

(52)

Wavelet Analysis

• FFT - frequency decomposition d

_j

• WT - frequency and time decomposition d

_j,k

 

k

(d

j,k2

) / N

j



E

j

• E

_j

= 2

j(2H-1)

C (The magic!!)

• log

₂

E

_j

= (2H-1)

j + log

₂

C

(53)

Self-similar

Periodic _{Multifractal?}

’Shape' of self-similarity

(54)

Evaluation Methodology

• Math

– Pen and papers – Economical

– Gives you the average

• Simulation

– Few computers and simulation software – Affordable

– Gives you the behavior or distribution

• Implementation

(55)

Which should you use?

Depends on what you care for the

problem in hand!

(56)

Assumptions

• It’s OK to leave out details

• But

– You need to be clear what details you leave out.

– You need to argue it is OK to leave those

details out for now.

– And you are working on including those details

and the results will be available in the future.

(57)

Assumptions

It’s OK to leave out details but you

need to be clear what details you

(58)

(59)

Traffic Papers

• V. Paxson, and S. Floyd, Wide-Area Traffic: The Failure of Poisson

Modeling. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 226-244, June 1995

• W. E. Leland, M. S. Taqqu, W. Willinger, and D. V. Wilson, On the Self-Similar Nature of Ethernet Traffic. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 1-15, Feb. 1995

• M. E. Crovella and A. Bestavros, Self-Similarity in World Wide Web Traffic: Evidence and Possible Causes. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Vol 5, No. 6, pp. 835-846, December 1997

• Anja Feldmann; Anna C. Gilbert; Polly Huang; Walter Willinger, Dynamics of IP traffic: A study of the role of variability and the impact of control. In the Proceeding of SIGCOMM '99, Cambridge, Massachusetts, September 1999

(60)

Topology Papers

• E. W. Zegura, K. Calvert and M. J. Donahoo. A Quantitative Comparison of Graph-based Models for Internet Topology. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, December 1997.

http://www.cc.gatech.edu/projects/gtitm/papers/ton-model.ps.gz

• M. Faloutsos, P. Faloutsos and C. Faloutsos. On power-law relationships of the Internet opology. Proceedings of Sigcomm 1999.

http://www.acm.org/sigcomm/sigcomm99/papers/session7-2.html

• H. Tangmunarunkit, R. Govindan, S. Jamin, S. Shenker, W. Willinger.

Network Topology Generators: Degree-Based vs. Structural. Proceedings of Sigcomm 2002.

http://www.isi.edu/~hongsuda/publication/USCTech02_draft.ps.gz

• D. Vukadinovic, P. Huang, T. Erlebach. On the Spectrum and Structure of Internet Topology Graphs. To appear in the proceedings of I2CS 2002.

(61)

Dynamics Papers

• Vern Paxson. End-to-end internet packet dynamics. ACM/IEEE Transactions on Networking, 7(3):277-292, June 1999.

• Aman Shaikh, Lampros Kalampoukas, Rohit Dube, and Anujan Varma. Routing stability in congested networks: Experimentation and analysis. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference, pages 163-174, Stockholm, Sweeden, August 2000. ACM

• Hongsuda Tangmunarunkit, Ramesh Govindan, and Scott Shenker. Internet path inflation due to policy routing. In Proceedings of the SPIE ITCom, pages 188-195, Denver, CO, USA, August 2001. SPIE • Lixin Gao. On inferring automonous system relationships in the

(62)

Case Study Papers

• J. Padhye, V. Firoiu, D. Towsley, and J. Kurose. Modeling TCP throughput: A simple model and its empirical validation. In

Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference, pages 303-314, Vancouver, Canada, September 1998. ACM

• J. Broch, D. Maltz, D. Johnson, Y. Hu, J. Jetcheva, A Performance Comparison of Multi-Hop Wireless Ad Hoc Network Routing

Protocols. In the Proceedings of the Fourth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom'98)

• M. Christiansen, K. Jeffay, D. Ott, and F. Donelson Smith. Tuning RED for web traffic. In ACM SIGCOMM2000, August 2000